Skip to main content
Tenders

Chelmsford College Photocopier Tender

Open
Deadline
18 days left
April 15, 2026
Contract Details
Category
Open Procedure
Reference
020337-2026
Value
£864,000
Location
North East England, United Kingdom
Published
March 20, 2026
Organization
CPV Code
Project Timeline

Tender Published

March 06, 2026

Deadline for Questions

April 08, 2026

Submission Deadline

April 15, 2026

Contract Start Date

July 31, 2026

Budget
£864,000
Duration
36 months
Location
North East England
Type
Open Procedure
75
Quality Score/100
Good

Original Tender Description

Chelmsford College is Looking to Lease 20 MFD's across both of our campuses for a period of 3 years with a potential to extend for a further two years.

Risk Analysis

Please log in to use risk analysis.

Login

Win Strategy

Please log in to access winning strategy recommendations.

Login

Competitors

Upgrade to see which companies are likely to bid on this tender, based on historical procurement data.

Login

Requirements & Qualifications

7 requirements across 5 categories

Submission (1)
Mandatory (1)
Compliance (1)
Technical (3)
Financial (1)
SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS1
--No specific requirements listed.
MANDATORY EXCLUSION GROUNDS1
--No specific requirements listed.
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS1
--No specific requirements listed.
TECHNICAL CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS3
--Lease 20 MFDs (Multi-Function Devices).
--Duration of lease: 3 years with a potential to extend for a further two years.
--CPV code: 30121100 - Photocopiers.
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS1
--Total value: 864000 EUR.

Requirements Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Documents

No processed documents available for this tender.

Documents will appear here once they are downloaded and analyzed.

75
Good

Tender Quality Score

This tender for photocopier leasing by Chelmsford College is generally well-structured, with clear basic information and financial details. However, it lacks specific evaluation criteria and detailed technical requirements, impacting its completeness and clarity.

Score Breakdown

Legal Compliance75/100

The tender adheres to basic legal requirements by having a clear procedure (open procedure), a specified CPV code, and no reported disputes. The deadline, while potentially short, is provided. The absence of a reveal date is a minor procedural oversight.

Missing reveal date
Clarity80/100

The core requirement of leasing 20 MFDs for 3 years with an extension option is clear. However, the lack of detailed technical specifications for the MFDs and the absence of specified evaluation criteria make the overall requirements less clear.

No evaluation criteria specified
No specific technical requirements listed beyond quantity and duration
Completeness70/100

Most basic information is present, including title, reference, organization, estimated value, and duration. However, the lack of detailed technical specifications and explicit eligibility/submission requirements means crucial documentation is missing.

No specific technical requirements listed
No specific eligibility requirements listed
Fairness85/100

The tender is an open procedure, promoting broad participation. The value is disclosed, and the deadline is specified. There are no apparent requirements tailored to specific companies, suggesting a fair process. The lack of e-submission is a minor drawback.

Practicality65/100

The tender specifies a contract start date and duration. However, the lack of explicit e-submission details and the absence of information regarding financing make it less practical for potential bidders.

No e-submission specified
No financing information provided
Data Consistency90/100

Key fields such as title, reference, organization, value, and dates are populated. There are no reported suspensions or disputes, and the dates provided are logical within the context of the tender.

Sustainability50/100

The tender does not explicitly mention any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation requirements. It is also not indicated as EU funded, suggesting a lack of focus on these areas.

Not green procurement
No social criteria

Strengths

Clear title, reference, and organization details
Estimated value and contract duration clearly specified
Open procedure promotes broad participation
CPV code provided

Concerns

Missing detailed technical specifications for MFDs
Absence of specified evaluation criteria
Lack of explicit e-submission process
No sustainability or innovation considerations

Recommendations

1. Provide detailed technical specifications for the MFDs.
2. Clearly outline the evaluation criteria for bid assessment.
3. Specify the e-submission process and any required platforms.

AI Scoring Preview

Sign up to view complete requirements and analysis

Complete quality score analysis
Detailed sub-score breakdown
Strengths & concerns insights
Strategic recommendations

No credit card required • Setup in 2 minutes

New Service

Want us to handle this tender?

Our procurement experts prepare everything. Proven to work — you review, approve, and submit.

~1hYour time only
80%+80%+
$0Upfront
See full comparison
Without TaaSWith TaaS
40-80 hrs
Preparation time
~1 hr
Your time only
15-25%
Average win rate
80%+
Win rate
Risk of errors
Manual review
Expert QA
Compliance check
You do all
Handle everything
We do all
End-to-end service
Let's Win This Tender
Pay only when you win · 400+ companies trust us
Or do it yourself

Add to Pipeline